Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Minor and major changes have occurred in campaign finance policy since 2002,
when Congress substantially amended campaign finance law via the
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA). The Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens
United v. FEC and a related lower-court decision, SpeechNow.org v.
FEC, arguably represent the most fundamental changes to campaign finance law
in decades. Citizens United lifted a previous ban on corporate (and
union) independent expenditures advocating election or defeat of candidates.
SpeechNow permitted unlimited contributions to such expenditures
and facilitated the advent of super PACs. Although campaign finance policy
remains the subject of intense debate and public interest, there have been few legislative
or regulatory changes to respond to the 2010 court rulings. This report
considers these and other developments in campaign finance policy and
comments on areas of potential conflict and consensus.

Legislative activity to respond to the rulings has focused on the DISCLOSE Act,
which passed the House during the 111th Congress, and was reintroduced during the 112th and 113th Congresses (H.R. 148).
Recent alternatives, which include some elements of DISCLOSE, include 113th Congress bills such as
Senators Wyden and Murkowski’s S. 791, or proposals that would require additional
disclosure from certain 501(c) groups.

As of this writing, six bills have been the subject of hearings, markups, or
both in the House or Senate. H.R. 94 and H.R. 95 would repeal part or all
of the presidential public financing program. H.R. 1994 would repeal the
Election Assistance Commission and return some functions to the Federal
Election Commission (FEC). S. 375 would require Senate political committees to electronically
file campaign finance reports with the FEC. Two Financial Services
appropriations measures contain provisions related to campaign finance.
H.R. 2786 would prohibit disclosure of certain political spending as a
condition of the government-contracting process. S. 1371 would require
electronic filing of Senate campaign finance reports. In addition, on September
23, 2013, the Senate confirmed two nominees to the Federal Election
Commission.

Debate has also continued at federal agencies and in the courts. Debate in
Congress and elsewhere has continued over the FEC’s enforcement practices.
The commission also has yet to issue anticipated rules implementing Citizens
United and some other litigation. Amid apparent stalemate at the FEC,
some observers have called for an increased role for federal agencies, such as
the Federal Communications Commission, Internal Revenue Service, or Securities
and Exchange Commission in policy areas related to campaign finance policy—a
topic that remains controversial. The Supreme Court is also considering a
challenge to aggregate individual contribution limits (McCutcheon v.
FEC).

This version of the report includes updated material that emphasizes the issues
most prominently before the 113th Congress. It also discusses foundational information about major
elements of campaign finance policy. Some issues discussed in previous
versions of the report, which appear to be less timely than they were in
the past, have been excluded from this version. This report will be
updated occasionally to reflect major developments.

For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.